#1/40

[photoncatcher]

Left

Nikon D50; 1/40; F/1.8; ISO 1600; 50mm

22/01/2011

[random-xpressions]

Guide her hands, she may be a little shy...

Random Xpressions

[enderspawn]

these have been in my brain for literal months now please just get them out of here

[linkcharacter]

I FUCKING LOVE YOUR ART RAGGGGHHHHH

can you PLEASE draw curly like this

im begging pleasse :'3 [its fine if ya dont honesly im js overrewacting]

sob

[10001gecs]

one 100 word email written with ai costs roughly one bottle of water to produce. the discussion of whether or not using ai for work is lazy becomes a non issue when you understand there is no ethical way to use it regardless of your intentions or your personal capabilities for the task at hand

with all due respect, this isnt true. *training* generative ai takes a ton of power, but actually using it takes about as much energy as a google search (with image generation being slightly more expensive). we can talk about resource costs when averaged over the amount of work that any model does, but its unhelpful to put a smokescreen over that fact. when you approach it like an issue of scale (i.e. "training ai is bad for the environment, we should think better about where we deploy it/boycott it/otherwise organize abt this) it has power as a movement. but otherwise it becomes a personal choice, moralizing "you personally are harming the environment by using chatgpt" which is not really effective messaging. and that in turn drives the sort of "you are stupid/evil for using ai" rhetoric that i hate. my point is not whether or not using ai is immoral (i mean, i dont think it is, but beyond that). its that the most common arguments against it from ostensible progressives end up just being reactionary

i like this quote a little more- its perfectly fine to have reservations about the current state of gen ai, but its not just going to go away.

[roscoehamiltons]

happy 40th birthday lewis 🎂 🎈

[laserwalnut]

I'M NEW HERE! Have my fish

[souvenir116]

An analysis because I'm going crazy over this interaction:

double shoulder squeeze

holding hands to the point of knuckles whitening

Charles going full launch and letting himself go for the hug, his chin on Max's shoulder, Max tapping his back three times + his eyes shining

Charles wrapping his arm around Max's waist so domestically + tap two times

They do part away- but God :

Couldn't you get enough Charlie?

Charles slowly hitting Max's love handle

Max's smile and Charles' fond sigh

[brown-spider]

I enjoyed Snapcube’s stream of Web of Shadows

[formulanni]

“Ya Know It Could Be Like This, Just Like This, Always."

Taglist: @st-leclerc @rubywingsracing @saviour-of-lord @three-days-time @emmasallowart

Sorry to everyone that follows that doesn’t fuck with ship art LOL

[girlishwhimsyy]

happy birthday to the goat!!

[photoncatcher]

Panasonic G5; 1/40; F/3.5; ISO 160; 14mm

24/09/2023

[liv0]

WICKED DIGITAL RELEASE ON DECEMBER 31 AND WE GETTING THE DELETED SCENES EVERYBODY GET UUUPPP

[marklikely]

finding out theres people in the sexyman tournament notes who dont know who cecil is

[correct-hermitcraft-quotes]

Skizz: And by "we": I am skeptical, but Tango used the number "100%".

Impulse: And I am also skeptical, but I am willing to follow Tango on this, because I'm his friend.

Skizz: Clearly I am too, because I'm his friend through the transitive property of Impulse.

[royalarchivist]

Roier: Guys, next up is– next up is Fit's death. Fck– the fcking bald guy. Man, why does Fit look like a poṛno actor? What the fck Fit? What's up with Fit, man?

[The clip plays, showing another player rushing up to Fit and quickly killing him in just a few hits]

Roier: Uy– No, Fit! What happened, Fit? Fit, no mam– Fit! The face, his face– [He snorts] Fit, no way Fit.

Fit: He got me. [Voice-over says "Player 128 eliminated"] Eh... We got isolated, we were in the wrong place. It's all good. You know? We–

Roier: "We. You know, we." And after that he said Nintendo Wii. Perfect. Very wise words from Fit. Very wise words.